already in effect. when leases turn over, most people are using smoke free leases nowadays, smoke landlords. our standard smoke free agreement is used by a lot of landlords and it's a smoke free lease. >> do you try to educate members to be sure they don't forget to do that? >> absolutely, we have a monthly magazine, a web site, we publish monthly announcements, we'd absolutely be doing our outreach. >> thank you, next speaker. thank you. >> hello, my name is victoria paque and i'm an advocate with the san francisco apartment association. the san francisco apartment soerkts supports the tobacco smoke disclosure. it would benefit prospective tenants who have a right to know if they might be exposed to second hand smoke in an apartment, and it would also help property owners and managers. letting prospective tenants know if the leases of

units surrounding an apartment allows smoking helps a tenant make an informed decision about living in a building. having this information before signing a lease and moving in will result in fewer situations where a new tenant is surprised and disappointed by second hand smoke. therefore, disclothesing this information should result in fewer broken leases due to second hand smoke and nuisance complaints. prudent landlords realize it will be offset by having future management problems due to second hand smoke. this disclosure is a good thing for both landlords and tenants. thank you for your time. >> thank you, next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors, my name is steve

morg basically, the thing about a nonsmoking policy, we provided a survey and what we did was surveyed managers and owners of all in the district of san francisco and here are some of the findings we found with those surveys. 57 providers are supportive of the disclosure law. 47 percent prohibit smoking in their leases. one-third of managers, owners have received tenants about second hand smoke. most residents throughout san francisco want a smoke free healthy lifestyle here in san francisco which will lead to better public health for all san franciscoans so we encourage that you support this mer err and we support and appreciate your support, supervisor mar and supervisor

campos, on this policy. >> thank you, mr. moor, thank you. each member of the public will be allotted the same number of minutes to speak, except that public speakers using translation assistance will be allowed to testify for twice the amount of the public testimony time limit. if simultaneous translation services are used, speakers will be governed by the public supreme supreme.

>> if there's anyone else who would like to speak? >> my name is stefan white, i'm a tenant at 922 post street. i understand as the law now is landlords can ban smoking in common areas of the building like the lobby but they are not allowed it ban it in apartments. when you have smoking in some apartments it drifts unquestionably it drifts into the apartments of those who don't smoke. hallways are filled with tobacco and marijuana smoke, so is the building and elevator and sometimes even the lobby area, even though i have not seen people actually smoking in those areas.

i really think unless you deal with the situation directly about smoking itself, this ordinance is not going to be enough because the demand for housing is so great in san francisco that people will take whatever is available, whether the landlords actually comply with this thing or not. i with also like to say that if you are going to ban smoking in buildings it has to include marijuana smoke as well as tobacco smoke. the california epa has determined there are carcinogenic products in marijuana smoke as well as tobacco smoke. i think it should be handed over to the department of health for some kind of enforcement, if not this ordinance then whatever ordinance you can come up with. >> next speaker. it looks like mr. paulson may be the last speaker. >> (singing)? this city

people smoke night and day, drive me crazy hey and the night. let the smoking magic and the music get to you and just enjoy your smoking self and all your wealth. living living in the smoky, living off the smoke wall, living off the smoke wall, let the magic in the city smoking music get to you, enjoy your smoking self, living off the smoking wall the wall, off the wall, on the boat free only want to be smoking free without and i hope the board will approve this deed. free, only want to be smoke free and i hope this city makes it won't you please on the boats and on the planes, the

smoke's coming to america. every place that flag unfurls, it's a big old smoky world. on the boats and on the planes, here comes the smoke again stop it please. >> thank you. seeing no other public comment, public xhebt is closed. so, colleagues, i wanted to, if there are no questions let me ask our deputy city attorney john gibner to give us a couple minor amendments and keep in mind the version in the ordinance in front of you is an amendment of the whole, i will be asking you to adopt the amendment but there are additional nonsubstantive amendments from mr. gibner. >> two amendments, one is in

the numbering. you will see in the draft before you the numbers are 19m.01, 19m.02. we would suggest the committee amend to just make them 19m.1, 19m.2, 19m.3 and second at the end of the draft before you, section 2 includes an operative date. that provision is simply no longer needed because the effective date will be after january 1st, 2013, so we suggest that you delete that. >> thank you. so, colleagues, i just wanted to acknowledge some of the public comments that i am in total agreement that this is a first step and that we need to do much more. my office will be doing our best to convene the coalition of property owners, landlords and tenant organizations to try to put our heads together to make stronger policies in the city. also i want to also just

acknowledge the sense of cooperation from the san francisco apartment association, the mission sro collaborative and other tenant groups in this process so i wanted to thank them all for putting a very good piece of legislation together and i urge your support. supervisor wiener. >> i think i support the legislation. i think we should be continuing the conversation about how we develop with multi unit buildings and smoking in general. one question i have which i haven't focused on, both this item and the last item, that a person brought up was both pieces of legislation are limited to tobacco as opposed to cannabis. i know this is an issue when i authored the legislation that we passed for jim warner and harvey milk plazas that banned smoking and there was no distinction made. the reason we went that route, when someone raised the issue,

we looked into it and it turned out the city had never made that distinction before for example in our parks code so we decided to go with what the precedent had been. particularly in someone's home i think it raises a lot of thorny issues because if someone is using cannabis for medicinal purposes, it's hard to tell them you can't do that in the privacy of your home, although cannabis smoke certainly can impact on surrounding units but also in terms of the public space legislation probably a similar kind of thing. so i don't know what the right answer is. it's a tough issue but i think it's one that we should continue to give thought to. >> agreed, agreed. so, colleagues, if there are no further comments, can we adopt the amendments as proposed by our deputy city attorney and the amendments of the whole without objection? >> yes. >> thank you. and can we

support this item as well without -- with a positive recommendation without objection? thank you. thank you, everyone, for coming out. we have one more item on the agenda. miss miller, would you call our last item. >> item 7 is a hearing on the status post redevelopment in the western addition. >> sponsor is christina olague. my understanding is she is to be joining us. my understanding is that there are no department presentations and i'm wondering if we can go to public comment and then hopefully the sponsor will join

us. so we'll hear first from planning and then from supervisor olague. so we have aaron star from planning. >> thought you forgot about me. good afternoon, supervisors, aaron star, planning department staff. i'm here to speak about current efforts to do a rezoning, create a name neighbor commercial district in an area that was previously under the authority of the redevelopment authority. we are trying to create a named area, the planning code has two categories of

neighborhood commercial districts, one is an individual namedd neighborhood commercial district. they are found throughout the city and when you make a change to one of these districts it affects all property zoned that throughout the city. named neighbor commercial districts are areas like the upper fillmore ncd, polk street ncd and when changes are made to these districts they only impact that one neighborhood. it also allows neighborhoods to create more taylored controls for these neighborhoods and to address specific needs and concerns. for instance, some neighborhoods have banned or required conditional use for restaurants because they feel there's an overconcentration of restaurants in their neighborhood, while other neighborhoods encourage restaurants because they like

to encourage their use. what supervisor olague's ordinance would do is take properties currently zoned nc3, which stands for neighborhood cooperative moderate scale and turn them into the fillmore mcd the boundaries of the ncd fit within the old boundaries of the redevelopment area for the western addition. i believe it went all the way to bush street, which is where this neighborhood district would end. the ordinance would also remove the minimum parking controls and institute maximum parking controls, this is a trend throughout the city and fits with the city's transit first policy. it would down zone sign requirements from nc3 standards to nc2 standards, and allow a 5 foot high bonus for properties that are 40 and 50 feet from the area. the supervisor would like this

continued to the beginning of this year so we will probably be asking for a continuance this thursday. the department supports the creation of an individually named ncd area on fillmore street. it helps preserve the character of the neighborhood and also helps preserve a sense of identification. we are asking for some modifications which have to do with expansion of the district as well as some minor clerical modifications. that concludes my presentation and of course i'm available for questions. >> thank you, mr. star, and we have supervisor olague. >> i wanted to thank mr. star and the planning department tore their work on this. we started those conversations with the merchant's association that is in the process of being formed along fillmore street because after redevelopment there was something called, well, the cvd was formed but then the cvd was not, was not

-- did not last when the fillmore center, i believe, no longer decided to participate in that process. so in order to allow for the merchants to talk about how they would like to move fillmore street forward, we started to engage in those conversations with them. there's a lot of -- because since the cbd had so much authority and a lot seemed to be monopolizing the conversation about what the vision for that street, we thought, well, maybe it would be better if it were in the hands at least the small businesses and that sort of thing to have that conversation come directly from the merchants. so then in the future there wouldn't be this reliance on the cbd to further that conversation. we've been asking for several months information from

redevelopment and as many of you know, the redevelopment agency really is no more in california and so there is an oversight board now that meets, so whatever questions we hear come from the public today and whatever questions we've been hearing for the past few months we'll make sure to pass on because we are gone officially as of january 8th. so we decided we needed to have this hearing now because we don't have a lot of time and we've tried to have hearings previously but it was just hard pulling the different departments together with the responses to the questions that we had. so hopefully moewd, the person who's been working on this project is on i believe sick leave so unable to be here to respond, but i do believe that valley brown may be returning to work in district 5 office or at least that's the rumor. if

that's the case then hopefully she'll be able to answer some of the questions that might come up today and that will definitely forward to her. also redevelopment agency certainly there's been a lot of really bad history in the western addition over the decades and accountability is something i think people would really like to see, so i am not sure how we necessarily achieve that other than continuing to kind of have to informational hearings and for people to continue to ask questions, which we will then again forward to redevelopment personnel to moewd and to the oversight board. but i believe that before supervisor mercurini left, he did request a audit and we will find out what the status of that is.

there were a lot of questions around $800,000 and we will find out about that and make sure member s of the public receive, but we didn't want to leave without having an opportunity for members of the public to put concerns or questions on the record which we can then forward on to the appropriate departments so people feel there is some movement toward establishing some accountability for some of the actions that have occurred in that part of the city over these number of years. so, again, one of the conversations that we just started was with the merchants to try to establish some controls along the lower fillmore area that we hope would be beneficial to the small businesses and small merchants there and smaller businesses there. so, again, that conversation continues and

at this point i'd say we open it up for public comment. we'll again forward on the questions and follow-up with miss brown, whoever would be in the supervisor's office to follow up on these questions. >> so let's open this up for public comment. do we have any speaker cards? >> i don't have any. >> then we should just ask people to line up on the side of the room if you can. two minutes per person. >> you know, with all due respect, i'm just going to tell you straight out. i know you mean well, but it doesn't make sense. let me give you a plain simple example. you want to make a difference on fillmore street? when you walk up the street to marcus garvey and martin luther king, those are families that own and will always be there forever and ever. you tell those folks, hey, we're going to make sure the commercial people, not the vbd, not the merchants, we're going to make sure they live up to their

responsibility. they are supposed to make sure the doors are open for people to come in and do a lot of events and things. picture this if you would, instead of busses coming in at 5:00, what if you create the traffic there. they are right now in a serious crisis but it's just a block away. everybody is looking for foot traffic. everybody is looking for an opportunity to do things, bring people from somewhere, all you have to do is walk up the street and say for the next 30 days we're going to make sure there's a terrible outrageous discount so you folks can participate because they don't participate. the foot traffic is right there so you change the name, that's like going to fillmore and golden gate street and telling everybody on that block, we're going to name this happy corner. it don't make sense to change names. what makes sense is to alieu --

allow people and weathered the storm, the reason they have not been meeting correctly it because there's no community participation and i don't mean from a level of somebody just coming and raising hell. what i'm talking about is for you folks to understand that nobody ever thought that the restaurants was going to save us. that's a family business. every business up and down fillmore street that's benefited that owes all this money now are either restaurants or clubs. the point, in closing, the point i'm making because this is something that is near and dear to me. i'm 57 years old and i'm born and raise the right here in san francisco, you know. >> so how do you think then that we can increase foot traffic from the --. >> by opening up the doors for the people that live there. you got 1300, you got almost 2 million dollars and you got a club there you can't even tell it's a club. you got people standing there and doing all this money back and forth from

japan and nobody goes on the street and says open the doors. here's the saddest thing i've ever seen in my life. >> everybody only gets two minutes. if you could finish your thought, that would be great. >> two minutes? i've been here 57 years, lady. you say valley will be here monday and people are out sick. you are not respecting the sbreg integrity of the folks already there. maybe you ought to just stop and let us grow and flow. >> thank you, next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors, my name is jake crafford. if you look at the fillmore district and compare it to divisidero and vezation

valley, you are having a lot of power shaping our neighborhood deciding what businesses go into the retail spaces, what organizations come to service our community. in the last year and a half there's literally been two meetings in our neighborhood regarding the $800,000, two meetings, and one of the things we agreed to with the mayor's office when they came in, they would have monthly meetings and they would have it monthly, that way when you have a important topic the community has an opportunity to talk. instead they only had two meetings in a year and a half and the way they were set up was to cause division in the neighborhood, so you can't have a proper discussion. this thing with the overhead propblgor, projector, fillmore

market place vendors, awning program, business attraction, they present all that and then only give you at the end 25 minutes for public comment. you only can pick on one comment so there's 5 different topics, you can pick on one topic. that's in september 2011. now, this is may 3rd of this year, which is the last meeting they had, if you look at the very bottom, this time they only gave us 7 minutes for public comment. so they had these 5 important topics in our community and at the end they give you 7 minutes for public comment. that's what we got in two years in terms of the huge impact the mayor's office is having determining our future. >> thank you. >> next speaker. >> hi, it's good to see everybody. my name is adrian williams and i have just a couple of comments. i do events along the

corridor. i understand what the requirements are and i have, we do kwanzu, we do batuzi in the corridor, mardi gras san francisco style. some of those buildings were there before there was a fillmore corridor and there were certain things promised to the community. i have a tendency to get those things done for me but overall one of the things i have a problem with, there's no enforcement. for instance, i know for a fact that $4 million was put in a fund from the jewish community high school to aid certificate holders and even with the 1300 going up, that building, we were promised that 13 of those certificate holders would be put in that building. well, they can't find any. now we have apartments going

up on turk street, $4 million is still in the kitty to help these people to come back but why aren't those funds being done? i saw an email from gia which really worried me in the respect you are turning away people because they can't afford the down payments, they can't afford to be there so what is that 4 million which was allocated specifically for the stake holders, i mean for the certificate holders, what happened to that money? is it still there or has it been given to the businesses for loans too? so that's one of my concerns. the other is marketing, people like me who are stake holders in that community who are trying to bring the foot traffic successfully by the way, we're getting ready to do our 7th year of kwanza, 7th year of mardi gras san francisco style. >> if you can finish, miss

williams. >> but we are treated as if we are second hand citizens. we were there before those businesses got there. for a people like me, who is trying to bridge the gap between the businesses and the community, give us some respect when it comes down to working with certain offices here in city hall and come back and debrief us and let us know. i know that it's trying coming to our neighborhood because we're passionate, but we do deserve to get feedback and to be listened to and to be heard and so i'm really interested in what happened to that $4 million and why people are still not being able to use that money that came from the jewish community high school for down payments for housing and that type of thing. is it still there, where is it? thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> former supervisor olague, thank you for bringing this important topic at this time. in the past after many, many

years ross mikarami was instrumental in having a hearing about the certificates. one thing leads to the other. now, today i attended the meeting on the successor agency to redevelopment and you know that you are creating yet another commission on, they call it infrastructure and investment, you know? now, while we were attending the other meeting, not once were these people who were appointed on this investment and infrastructure attended that meeting. now what's happening here, supervisor christina olague, when you speak the truth, people don't like it. there were a bunch of whoever you call